Loading ...University Enrollment Down
November 27th, 2007With all the talk about slowing down the growth rate of Nevada’s nation-leading expansion of government, today’s story in the Review Journal about higher education enrollment growth is worth noting.
The number of students at Nevada’s two universities fell slightly this fall, which could help spur steep fee increases as early as next year.
Preliminary data showed a modest enrollment increase in the entire Nevada System of Higher Education of 1.2 percent, about 1,200 students more than 2006.
Three of the system’s seven colleges saw increases in enrollment: the College of Southern Nevada, Nevada State College in Henderson and Truckee Meadows Community College in Reno.
Tougher entrance requirements caused University of Nevada, Las Vegas’ enrollment to drop 0.7 percent and the University of Nevada, Reno to experience a 0.5 percent decrease, officials suggested.
For the last ten years, Nevada System of Higher Education officials have shrieked that they MUST have more money to handle enrollment growth. Now, they are shrieking that they MUST have more money to handle slowing enrollment growth - hence the projected “steep” tuition increases.
One interesting note - projected enrollments in our state budget are “annualized” - adjusted downward to reflect the historical trend of even lower enrollment in the spring semester. This is due to students graduating in December, and more students dropping out than starting up over the holidays. Thus, the comparison between actual and budgeted enrollments will be even more dramatic come Easter.
Meanwhile, here’s an opinion piece from the Rocky Mountain News highlighting the growing and outrageous cost of higher education in America.
“The U.S.A. spends more on higher education, as a percentage of gross domestic product, than any other industrialized country, according to the Education Department.” - USA Today
Bet you didn’t know that. On the other hand, you very likely did know - because it’s mentioned repeatedly - that this country spends more on health care, as a percentage of gross domestic product, than every other advanced country.
Why is spending so much on health care considered a national scandal by many commentators but the outsized spending on higher education is not?
Could part of the answer be that the health-care system is studied, analyzed and dissected by a scholarly community that simply isn’t willing to apply the same critical perspective toward the institutions that sign its checks?
To the contrary: The self-interested consensus among academics is that this country needs to spend far more on higher education.
November 28th, 2007 at 9:31 pm
Higher education, medical cost and airlines are all examples of where government actions have corrupted the normal market balance of demand and supply.
Government has flooded higher education with money by allowing unlimited financial credit to students plus tons of direct cash subsidies. This allows these institutions to continue to raise the tuition rates. Normally, they could only raise the rates to a point where the students could not afford to pay the tuition. The student can borrow $20,000 a year then they will charge $20,000 a year.
Government significantly influences the supply of doctors and nursing by limiting and controlling the programs that produce this labor flow. Also, government is constraining the productivity of this labor by forcing them to practice defensive medicine. The result is highly inefficient limited labor that drives up the cost of medical services and the cost of drugs.
Airlines are another example. There is an obviously oversupply of airline companies which drives down the price of the airline ticket but also drives down quality of service. If we did not have overly protective bankruptcy laws and overly protective union laws, then one of these airlines would have gone out of business by now. That would have driven up the cost of airline tickets, but most likely there would be an improvement in quality of service.
December 1st, 2007 at 10:36 am
It’s time for the taxpayer to be taken off the hook for the
outrageous costs of higher education which only benefit those
that go. Why are we subjected to the rants of the likes of
Jim Rogers screeching that the taxpayers have to pony up to
the plate to support the Greenspun building or some other
pet project of someone with more money than sense. Those who
wish to contribute should. But it should not be contingent on taxpayers matching their contributions so they can have a building named after them. The contributors and students should pay the toll. Not the taxpayer who is not using this.
And while we’re at it, the casinos get taxpayer funded culinary union members at taxpayer expense. Raise the taxes
on them. I’ve paid enough for idiots to study remedial reading
and math!